See previous: NY Times Seeks Help From Ruth Bader Ginsburg Against Feds’ Investigation Into Tipping Off Terror Funding Charities

Supreme Court to NYTimes: Buzz off
Michelle Malkin

I noted the NYTimes' attempt this weekend to seek protection from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for two accused blabbermouth reporters, whom the feds believe tipped off two Muslim charities fronting for terror.

Well, wonders never cease. The Times reports this afternoon that the court rebuffed the leak-dependent paper:

The United States Supreme Court refused today to stop a federal prosecutor from reviewing the telephone records of two reporters for The New York Times. The records, the paper said, include information about many of the reporters’ confidential sources.

In a one-sentence order offering no reasoning and noting no dissenting votes, the Supreme Court rejected a request from The Times to stay a lower court’s decision while the paper tried to persuade the high court to review the case. ...

***

Supreme Court Rejects NY Times On Leak Probe
John Stevenson

Via AP

The Supreme Court ruled against The New York Times on Monday, refusing to block the government from reviewing the phone records of two Times reporters in a leak investigation of a terrorism-funding probe.

The one-sentence order came in a First Amendment battle that involves stories written in 2001 by Times reporters Judith Miller and Philip Shenon revealing the government’s plans to freeze the assets of two Islamic charities, the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation.

Shenon and Miller called the two organizations for comment after being told by confidential sources of the government’s plans.

The Justice Department says the move tipped off the charities of planned government raids. The federal judge who ruled in the Times’ favor said there is no evidence in the case even suggesting that the reporters tipped off the charities about the raids or that the reporters even knew of the government’s plans to raid either charity.

The government says that the fact that the reporters relayed disclosures from a government source to “targets of an imminent law enforcement action substantially weakens any claim of freedom of the press.”

A wise ruling in the benefit for National Security. ...